Reproductive health and violations of the human right to body integrity

Literature review

Authors

Keywords:

reproductive health, human rights and bodily integrity, female genital mutilation, male circumcision, WHO, international acts, change in legal ideology

Abstract

Background. The article analyses the current practice of violating the right to bodily integrity, focuses on the international and European regulation of the problem, the policies of the WHO and other international institutions, and indicates the policy of discrimination on the basis of age and gender inequality in the reproductive sphere.
Objective of the review: to study the medical and non-medical practice of implementing and protecting the human right to bodily integrity through the study of the problem of legal protection against female genital mutilation and male circumcision.
Materials and methods. The authors have chosen an intercomplementary methodological approach, which allows a social phenomenon of a medical nature to be considered through the prism of a somatic problem, medical harm, doctor’s orders, as well as from other social points of view in combination with legal, social, cultural and moral factors. To systematize legal regulation, the grouping method is distinguished, and the method of axiological idealism is used to understand the humanistic direction of legal policy in the field of reproductive and sexual human rights, to determine the value determinants of legal reality in modern society and to search for optimal possibilities of the legal system in this field.
Analysis of literary data. The article examines the legal ideology in the field of protection of the right to physicality in the reproductive sphere, conducts a comprehensive analysis of the practice of female genital mutilation and presents a representative analysis of male circumcision as a controversial method of medical intervention.
Conclusions. Based on the analysis of regulatory legal acts of the international and European level, individual national practices, and positions of medical associations, we note that at the current stage of development of legal ideology in the field of medical law, the WHO approach does not meet modern legal requirements for combating torture, the legal interpretation of the human right to autonomy in the field of treatment, the value of childhood and non-discrimination on the basis of age.

Author Biographies

M.M. Blikhar, Institute of Jurisprudence, Psychology and Innovative Education of the National University “Lviv Polytechnic”, Lviv

Doctor of juridical sciences, professor, head of the Department of Administrative and Informational Law

I.I. Komarnytska, Institute of Jurisprudence, Psychology and Innovative Education of the National University “Lviv Polytechnic”, Lviv

Doctor of juridical sciences, professor, Department of Civil Law and Procedure

I.І. Shulhan, Institute of Jurisprudence, Psychology and Innovative Education of the National University “Lviv Polytechnic”, Lviv

PhD, аssociate professor, Department of Administrative and Informational Law

M.M. Yaremchuk, Lviv State University of Internal Affairs, Lviv

PhD, Department of Criminal Procedure and Criminalistics of the Faculty No. 1 (Training specialists for pre-trial investigation units of the National Police of Ukraine)

M.V. Vulchyn, Lviv State University of Internal Affairs, Lviv

Postgraduate student, Department of Criminal Procedure and Criminalistics of the Faculty No. 1 (Training specialists for pre-trial investigation units of the National Police of Ukraine)

References

  1. Sladden T, Philpott A, Braeken D, et al. Sexual Health and Wellbeing through the Life Course: Ensuring Sexual Health, Rights and Pleasure for All. International Journal of Sexual Health. 2021; 33(4):565–71. DOI: 10.1080/19317611.2021.1991071
  2. Pérez-Curiel P, Vicente E, Morán ML, Gómez, LE. The Right to Sexuality, Reproductive Health, and Found a Family for People with Intellectual Disability: A Systematic Review. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2023; 20, 1587. DOI: 10.3390/ijerph20021587
  3. Matanda DJ, Van Eekert N, Croce-Galis M, et al. What interventions are effective to prevent or respond to female genital mutilation? A review of existing evidence from 2008–2020. PLOS Glob Public Health 2023; 3(5):e0001855. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pgph.0001855
  4. Ayenew AA, Mol BW, Bradford B, et al. Prevalence of female genital mutilation and associated factors among women and girls in Africa: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Syst Rev 2024; 13:26. DOI:10.1186/s13643-023-02428-6
  5. Stevenson K, Kelly B. New research on the global prevalence of female genital mutilation/cutting: research, clinical, and policy implications. PLoS Med. 2022;19(9):e1004096. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1004096
  6. Andrusyak IP. Prevention and Counteraction to Domestic Violence: Theoretical and Legal Research [dissertation on the internet]. Lviv: Lviv Polytechnic National University, 2024. Available from: https://lpnu.ua/sites/default/files/2024/dissertation/29132/disertaciya-andrusyak.pdf
  7. Barbé E, Badell D. Chasing gender equality norms: the robustness of sexual and reproductive health and rights. International Relations. 2023; 37(2):274–297. DOI: 10.1177/00471178221136994
  8. Huzaimah A, Abdillah M, Laila N.Q, et al. Disregarding the Reproductive Rights of Women in Child Marriage in Indonesia. Samarah: Jurnal Hukum Keluarga dan Hukum Islam 2023; 7(2). DOI: 10.22373/sjhk.v7i2.17392
  9. Turyansky YuI. Somatic human rights in the modern doctrine of constitutionalism: theoretical and legal research: monograph. Kyiv: Lyudmila Publishing House, 2020. 487 p.
  10. Masic I, Izetbegovic S. The role of medical staff in providing patients rights. Med Arch. 2014;68 (1):61–64. DOI:10.5455/medarh.2014.68.61-64.
  11. Shchyrba MYu. The legal status of patients: theoretical and legal research: monograph. Lutsk: SPD Hadyak Zhanna Volodymyrivna, printing house «Volynpoligraf», 2019. 492 p.
  12. Boyle A. Human Rights and the Environment: Where Next? EJIL. 2012;23(3):613–42. DOI:10.1093/ejil/chs054
  13. Universal Declaration of Human Rights: UN; International document of 10.12.1948 [Internet]. [Інтернет]. Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine. Available from: https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/995_015#Text
  14. International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights: UN; International document of 16.12.1966. [Internet]. Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine. Available from: http://zakon3.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/995_042
  15. European Social Charter (revised) (ETS No. 163): International document of 03.05.1996 No. ETS No. 163. Bulletin of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine. 2007; 51. [Internet]. Council of Europe. Available from: https://rm.coe.int/168007cf93
  16. European Parliament, Council of the European Union, European Commission Charter of the Fundamental Rights of the European Union of 18 December 2000, C 364/5. [Internet] Official Journal of the European Communities. 2000 18 Dec. Available from: https://www.europarl. europa.eu/charter/pdf/text_en.pdf
  17. European Charter of Patients’ Rights. [Internet] 2002 Oct 15. Available from: http://biogarmonia.com.ua/docs/charter.pdf
  18. EU4Health programme 2021-2027 – a vision for a healthier European Union [Internet]. European Commission Available from: https://health.ec.europa.eu/funding/eu4health-programme-2021-2027-vision-healthier-european-union_en
  19. Hawaii Declaration II: (As approved by the General Assembly of the World Psychiatric Association in Vienna, Austria, on 10th July 1983) [Internet]. World Psychiatric Association. Available from: https://www.wpanet.org/declaration-of-hawaii-ii
  20. Fundamentals of the Legislation of Ukraine on Healthcare: (The Official Bulletin of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine (BVR), 1993, No. 4, Article 19) [Internet]. Available from: https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/2801-12?lang=en#Text
  21. A declaration on the promotion of patients’ rights in Europe (European consultation on the rights of patients Amsterdam 28-30 march 1994) [Internet]. Available from:. URL: https://bmop.pt/declaracaopelosdireitosdosdoentesnaeuropa.pdf
  22. Recommendation of the Committee of Ministers to member states on the problem of the patient as an active participant in his/her treatment No. R (80): Council of Europe, International Document of 30.04.1980 No. R(80) 4 [Internet] Available from: https://www.coe.int/t/dg3/health/recommendations_en.asp
  23. International Conference on Population and Development (ICPD), held in Cairo, 05–13 September 1994 [Internet]. United Nations Population Fund. 1994. Available from: https://www.unfpa.org/icpd
  24. Тhe United Nations Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) of 18 December 1979 [Internet]. United Nations. Available from: https://www.ohchr.org/en/instruments-mechanisms/instruments/convention-elimination-all-forms-discrimination-against-women
  25. Global strategy to accelerate the elimination of cervical cancer as a public health problem [Internet]. World Health Organization 17 November 2020 Available from: https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789240014107
  26. European Parliament resolution of 24 June 2021 on the situation of sexual and reproductive health and rights in the EU, in the frame of women’s health (2020/2215(INI)) [Internet]. European Parliament. 2021. Available from: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA-9-2021-0314_EN.html
  27. Recommendation of the Committee of Ministers to member states on the inclusion of gender differences in health policy. Оn 30 January 2008 at the 1016th meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies. [Internet] CM/Rec. 2008 Jan. Available from: https://search.coe.int/cm?i=09000016805d4212
  28. Resolution adopted by the General Assembly on 20 December 2012 [on the report of the Third Committee (A/67/450 and Corr.1)] 67/146. Intensifying global efforts for the elimination of female genital mutilations. [Internet] A/RES/67/146 5 March 2013 Available from: https://documents.un.org/doc/undoc/gen/n12/487/36/pdf/n1248736.pdf
  29. The Council of Europe Convention on preventing and combating violence against women and domestic violence (Istanbul Convention) on 11 May 2011. [Internet] Council of Europe. Available from: https://www.coe.int/en/web/gender-matters/council-of-europe-convention-on-preventing-and-combating-violence-against-women-and-domestic-violence
  30. European Parliament resolution of 7 February 2018 on zero tolerance for Female Genital Mutilation (FGM) (2017/2936(RSP)) [Internet] Official Journal of the European Union. 2018 Feb. Available from: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52018IP0033
  31. Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council: Towards the Elimination of Female Genital Mutilation. COM/2013/0833 [Internet]. European Union. 2013. Available from: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A52013DC0833
  32. Earp BD, Johnsdotter S. Current critiques of the WHO policy on female genital mutilation. Int J Impot Res. 2021; 33, 196–209. DOI:10.1038/s41443-020-0302-0
  33. Earp BD, Shahvisi A, Reis-Dennis S, Reis E. The need for a unified ethical stance on child genital cutting. Nursing Ethics 2021; 28 (7–8):1294–305. DOI: 10.1177/0969733020983397
  34. Brussels Collaboration on Bodily Integrity. Medically unnecessary genital cutting and the rights of the child: moving toward consensus. Am J Bioeth. 2019;19:17–28. DOI: 10.1080/15265161.2019.1643945
  35. Farouki L, El-Dirani Z, Abdulrahim, S, et al. The global prevalence of female genital mutilation/cutting: A systematic review and meta-analysis of national, regional, facility, and school-based studies. PLoS Med, 2022; 19(9): e1004061. DOI:10.1371/journal. pmed.1004061
  36. Smith A, Hegarty P. An experimental philosophical bioethical study of how human rights are applied to clitorectomy on infants identified as female and as intersex. Culture, Health & Sexuality, 2020; 23(4), 548–63. DOI:10.1080/13691058.2020.1788164
  37. Diouf K, Nour, NM. Female Genital Mutilation/Cutting. In: Ades, V. (eds) Sexual and Gender-Based Violence. Springer, Cham. 2020 DOI:10.1007/978-3-030-38345-9_11
  38. Classification of female genital mutilation. From: World Health Organization. Eliminating Female Genital Mutilation: An interagency statement. [Internet] World Health Organization. 2008. Available from: https://iris.who.int/bitstream/handle/10665/43839/9789241596442_eng.pdf?sequence=1
  39. Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment: UN international document 10.12.1984. [Internet]. Available from: https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/995_085#Text
  40. Onsongo N. Female Genital Cutting: Who Defines Whose Culture as Unethical? International Journal of Feminist Approaches to Bioethics 2017; 10 (2):105–123.
  41. Rashid A, Iguch,i Y, Afiqah SN. Medicalization of female genital cutting in Malaysia: A mixed methods study. PLOS Medicine, 2020 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1003303
  42. World Health Organization. Guidelines on the management of health complications from female genital mutilation. Geneva: WHO. 2018. Available from: https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789241549646.
  43. Pérez-López F. R, Ornat L, López-Baena MT, et al. Association of female genital mutilation and female sexual dysfunction: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Europ J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2020; 254: 236-244. DOI: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2020.09.031.
  44. Sano Y, Konkor I, Antabe R, et al. Physical intimate partner violence justification and female genital mutilation in Kenya: evidence from the demographic and health survey J Aggress Maltreat Trauma. 2021; 30:781–91. DOI:10.1080/10926771.2020.1854913
  45. Buggio, L, Facchin, F, Chiappa, L., et al. Psychosexual Consequences of Female Genital Mutilation and the Impact of Reconstructive Surgery: A Narrative Review. Health Equity; 2019; 3: 36–46. DOI: 10.1089/heq.2018.0036. eCollection 2019.
  46. Nzinga A-M, De Andrade Castanheira S, Hermann, J, et al. Consequences of Female Genital Mutilation on Women’s Sexual Health – Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis, The Journal of Sexual Medicine, 2021; 18 (4): 750–60. DOI: 10.1016/j.jsxm.2021.01.173
  47. Morris B, Rivin BE, Sheldon M, Krieger JN. Neonatal Male Circumcision: Clearly Beneficial for Public Health or an Ethical Dilemma? A Systematic Review. Cureus. 2024 Feb 23;16(2):e54772. DOI: 10.7759/cureus.54772
  48. Morris BJ, Katelaris A, Blumenthal NJ, et al. Evidence-based circumcision policy for Australia. J Mens Health. 2022;18. DOI: 10.31083/j.jomh1806132
  49. Morris BJ, Wamai RG, Henebeng EB. Estimation of country-specific and global prevalence of male circumcision. Popul Health Metr. 2016;14:4. DOI: 10.1186/s12963-016-0073-5
  50. The Brussels Collaboration on Bodily Integrity. Genital Modifications in Prepubescent Minors: When May Clinicians Ethically Proceed? The American Journal of Bioethics, 2024: 1–50. DOI: 10.1080/15265161.2024.2353823
  51. Royal Dutch Medical Association (KNMG): Non-therapeutic circumcision of male minors [Internet]. Utrecht: Royal Dutch Medical Association. KNMG. 2010. Available from: https://www.knmg.nl/download/non-therapeutic-circumcision-of-male-minors-knmg-viewpoint
  52. Toribio-Vázquez C, Yebes, Á, Quesada-Olarte, J. et al. Genital Mutilation in Males. Curr Urol Rep 2023; 24:121–6. DOI: 10.1007/s11934-022-01129-2
  53. Hammond T, Carmack A. Long-term adverse outcomes from neonatal circumcision reported in a survey of 1,008 men: an overview of health and human rights implications. The International Journal of Human Rights. 2017; 21(2), 189–218. DOI: 10.1080/13642987.2016.1260007

Downloads

Published

2024-12-31

How to Cite

Blikhar, M., Komarnytska, I., Shulhan, I., Yaremchuk, M., & Vulchyn, M. (2024). Reproductive health and violations of the human right to body integrity: Literature review. REPRODUCTIVE ENDOCRINOLOGY, (75), 59–65. Retrieved from https://reproduct-endo.com/article/view/322533

Issue

No. 75 (2024)

Section

Interdisciplinary problems

License

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:

    1. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.

    1. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.